Conquest Changes Following 7.4.1

[Samcuu]

2 hours ago, captainbladejk said:

The reason the comparison is made is because some of the so called uber pvp bunch want to say "why should you get 43k for one click of doing nothing" even though they can get paid full entire bars of conquest for doing nothing at all just by going AFK in a pvp match

Name names then. I've seen one person say this and he's a gsf player. The afk thing isn't actually an issue in warzones because the weekly takes far more games played than GSF for example. There were two players I can think of that were known as serial afkers in wzs and they've both been banned. Again it's probably much more of an issue in GSF because it's far easier to get the weekly there than in wzs, and takes much less time if it's popping.

Not to be rude but I feel like you have no clue about pvp in this game because pvpers don't care about conquest. I'm in pvp guilds who don't even set conquest targets lol. They are in pvp to kill other players that's basically it and they'd be in there regardless of how much conquest you get for doing it. More ppl have started playing in the last year but I don't feel like it's a conquest thing, more because of the seasons track and the rewards from the vendor for pvp tokens. There are far better ways to gain conquest than go afk in a wz. I've already broken down the time it takes. If ur putting ur team at a disadvantage u are going to lose a lot. You need 12 losses in matches that average about 12 minutes, not considering time u wait in queue. So do the math, even on the conservative side its gonna take 3 hours for maybe 200 - 250k conquest. Plus all the toxicity you experience when ur afk in a match. You can gain the same amount of points if not more from actually doing things in game u might enjoy, and also being able to spread the conquest points out to more toons. 

Edited March 30 by Samcuu

[Traceguy]

10 hours ago, Darev said:

That's not difficult to find, it's part of a story/quest chain.

I never said it was difficult to find. Also, your comment leads me to believe you're thinking of a different spot 

[Traceguy]

10 hours ago, Darev said:

The two changes I love about this patch are unlocking new daily areas based on legacy, and infinite 5k points for each heroic across all your alts.

They just made conquest super easy.   Maybe not fast, but practically brainless.  Whether you want to say that's a good thing or a bad thing, that's based on your point of view.  I've been wanting that back since they took it away after the first iteration of Conquest when you invaded NS and could practically max out CQ on each toon by doing all the heroics on NS.

Does it make up for the loss of the speed of the 45k from the rep token.  No, of course not.

The change to heroics is something that was long over due. The problem is that the benefit this brings is meniscal without the points from rep gain.

I said this a few times already, but I'll keep saying it so that @EricMusco @JoeStramaglia or @KeithKanneg can see it. At 5k Conquest Points per heroic, it will take 9 EXTRA heroics per day to get back the points lost from the rep change. That means we have to do 63 more heroics per week to get back on track to where we were before 7.4.1.... We won't taste the benefits of this change until our 64th EXTRA heroic for the week.

[Darev]

47 minutes ago, Traceguy said:

The change to heroics is something that was long over due. The problem is that the benefit this brings is meniscal without the points from rep gain.

I said this a few times already, but I'll keep saying it so that @EricMusco @JoeStramaglia or @KeithKanneg can see it. At 5k Conquest Points per heroic, it will take 9 EXTRA heroics per day to get back the points lost from the rep change. That means we have to do 63 more heroics per week to get back on track to where we were before 7.4.1.... We won't taste the benefits of this change until our 64th EXTRA heroic for the week.

This is only for a single toon.

If you normally do multiple toons on a single day, you can keep going and going and going.

It's more work if you do one toon per day per server...which according to the rationale Musco gave, is what they're trying to reign in for the people doing it on multiple servers.

I don't agree with it, but it's their call to make.
The person posting in this thread, saying something I've repeatedly said in the past, to "vote with your wallets" is the only thing they'll listen to when they're intent on keeping a change.  Which is what seems to be the case here.

Speaking for myself, the loss of ~37k conquest points (old value minus current value) per token consumption is not enough of a bad thing to even think of unsubbing.

[DeannaVoyager]

3 hours ago, Samcuu said:

Name names then. I've seen one person say this and he's a gsf player. The afk thing isn't actually an issue in warzones because the weekly takes far more games played than GSF for example. There were two players I can think of that were known as serial afkers in wzs and they've both been banned. Again it's probably much more of an issue in GSF because it's far easier to get the weekly there than in wzs, and takes much less time if it's popping.

Not to be rude but I feel like you have no clue about pvp in this game because pvpers don't care about conquest. I'm in pvp guilds who don't even set conquest targets lol. They are in pvp to kill other players that's basically it and they'd be in there regardless of how much conquest you get for doing it. More ppl have started playing in the last year but I don't feel like it's a conquest thing, more because of the seasons track and the rewards from the vendor for pvp tokens. There are far better ways to gain conquest than go afk in a wz. I've already broken down the time it takes. If ur putting ur team at a disadvantage u are going to lose a lot. You need 12 losses in matches that average about 12 minutes, not considering time u wait in queue. So do the math, even on the conservative side its gonna take 3 hours for maybe 200 - 250k conquest. Plus all the toxicity you experience when ur afk in a match. You can gain the same amount of points if not more from actually doing things in game u might enjoy, and also being able to spread the conquest points out to more toons. 

If pvp players don't care about conquest, then all the more reason to nerf those points.

And since GSF is also a form of pvp, it shouldn't get any special treatment either. It's a lot easier indeed and with any any luck you only need to finish two matches for the weekly. It will take half an hour and they get 120k for the weekly plus the points from winning a match twice. On top of that they are getting points towards the ship objective.

[Samcuu]

9 minutes ago, DeannaVoyager said:

pvp players don't care about conquest, then all the more reason to nerf those points.

Except the whole reason they made seasons was to get more ppl in queue, so they are using the seasons rewards and high conquest as the carrot to make ppl queue and pull the cart. Pvp should have high conquest tho considering the amount of time u have to dedicate to finish the weekly. 

[DeannaVoyager]

10 minutes ago, Samcuu said:

Pvp should have high conquest tho considering the amount of time u have to dedicate to finish the weekly. 

Only for solo players, they usually have to do all 12.  However premades wipe the floor with solo players and get away with 4 matches while ruining the game for solo players.  They are only spending a fraction of the time in pvp compared to solo players. 

If you want cqp based on the amount of time dedicated to finish weekly, then that should also apply to pve. Right now it doesn't. Look at HM and MM ops points. While the operation might be done within an hour, before that those people have had to learn to play, gear up, progress the ops, find a group and then kill every boss. That's way more time dedicated than what a pvp weekly needs, yet the points we get from MM ops is less than Iokath weekly.

Edited March 30 by DeannaVoyager

[Samcuu]

7 minutes ago, DeannaVoyager said:

Only for solo players, they usually have to do all 12.  However premades wipe the floor with solo players and get away with 4 matches while ruining the game for solo players.  They are only spending a fraction of the time in pvp compared to solo players. 

If you want cqp based on the amount of time dedicated to finish weekly, then that should also apply to pve. Right now it doesn't. Look at HM and MM ops points. While the operation might be done within an hour, before that those people have had to learn to play, gear up, progress the ops, find a group and then kill every boss. That's way more time dedicated than what a pvp weekly needs, yet the points we get from MM ops is less than Iokath weekly.

Not really tho because a lot of ppl are just there to kill other players and they hardly ever win or do objs but like I said they don't care and aren't concerned about finishing weeklies. 

No disagreement from me I don't do pve but I have been in ops sporadically and it's def time consuming. Massive oversight if finishing harder content in game doesn't give u the proper conquest rewards. 

[Toraak]

As a GSF player. If people go AFK in the matches they deserve 0 conquest points, 0 credit for the weekly, and 0 of any reward associated with it.

 

If you want the rewards, you should be actively trying. I don't care if your not as skilled as others, but at least TRY.

 

I would not be opposed to Broadsword making it so you needed so many medals in a match for someone to get credit for that match for the daily/weekly or conquest.

[Valdartak]

So, I reactivated with a two month sub so I could do this quest line that half was behind a sub/paywall and you have it messed up to where everything I have done counts for nothing? Where is my refund for the sub?

[captainbladejk]

1 hour ago, Samcuu said:

Name names then. I've seen one person say this and he's a gsf player. The afk thing isn't actually an issue in warzones because the weekly takes far more games played than GSF for example. There were two players I can think of that were known as serial afkers in wzs and they've both been banned. Again it's probably much more of an issue in GSF because it's far easier to get the weekly there than in wzs, and takes much less time if it's popping.

For the bit in italics, gonna have to pass on eating warning points for calling out other people. 

I highly doubt those people were banned purely for AFK as you say. Going AFK itself is not a crime or against ToS. Sometimes things happen and people have to go right then and there. To try to ban someone for going AFK they would need to prove conclusively they're doing so to be malicious. You on the player-side do not have any idea why that person went AFK unless they tell you. They could claim technical issue or emergency and you have no way to disprove them off that alone. You would need to have some kind of evidence to show they're doing it maliciously and it would have to be conclusive. What I find most likely is they were banned for other stuff aside from AFK like win trading. Also, GSF is still pvp only in a different form as by its nature you're going against other players at its core. 

1 hour ago, Samcuu said:

Not to be rude but I feel like you have no clue about pvp in this game because pvpers don't care about conquest. I'm in pvp guilds who don't even set conquest targets lol. They are in pvp to kill other players that's basically it and they'd be in there regardless of how much conquest you get for doing it. More ppl have started playing in the last year but I don't feel like it's a conquest thing, more because of the seasons track and the rewards from the vendor for pvp tokens. There are far better ways to gain conquest than go afk in a wz. I've already broken down the time it takes. If ur putting ur team at a disadvantage u are going to lose a lot. You need 12 losses in matches that average about 12 minutes, not considering time u wait in queue. So do the math, even on the conservative side its gonna take 3 hours for maybe 200 - 250k conquest. Plus all the toxicity you experience when ur afk in a match. You can gain the same amount of points if not more from actually doing things in game u might enjoy, and also being able to spread the conquest points out to more toons. 

Since you were candid with me (no issues with that btw) allow me to be equally as candid. YOU may not care about conquest, but you are one person with one opinion in the wider game and are not the exclusive example of what a pvp does/doesn't want anymore than I could claim to represent all pve players. All either of us can do is speak for ourselves and reference what other people say from time to time. I'm glad you/them enjoy your gameplay, likewise everyone should be able to do the same and the enjoyment of other people who DO like conquest and similar has been negatively effected while certain individuals continue to argue for the nerfing of pve objectives. All while conveniently ignoring the issues in their own wheel houses. You personally not caring about conquest doesn't invalidate anything I've said above, it simply means you're the exception to it. 

Far as to my experience since you must know, I've been here since beta and prior to my retirement from pvp as a whole, I was killing sith sorcs on my shadow before they were nerfed the first time. I don't claim to know everything about the game, but I have a good enough grasp on it to get me through. With that in mind, getting trolled rightfully/wrongly by people for being AFK in a match doesn't mean it can't happen. 

 

Now far as calculations go, I'm very glad you mentioned that because I've already ran calculations previously. I'm also very glad you mentioned matches being 12 minutes long vs the number I had in mind. So with that said, let's get into the numbers. We'll start out with my previous pvp calculations and then compare them to pve. For my calculations I did not count time waiting in a queue for either side because there is no way to quantify it since it can and will vary from person to person, waiting in a queue isn't work or playing, and it can be bypassed largely if you have a group. 

For the big pvp dailies you have the 143k Arena, 143k Warzone, 110k Starfighter dailies. To complete these you need to do the "weekly" quest of completing so many matches, 16 for arena, 16 for warzone, with wins counting for 3 points each. Then for GSF you need to do 7 matches or 4 wins with wins counting for 2 points each. Assuming a person is lucky and racks up win after win, that's a total of 4 warzone matches for 32k conquest (8k each), 6 arenas at 48k total (8k each), and 4 starfighter matches for 44k total (11k each) on top of the big dailies. Total amount of points is 520k per day. For total time spent on the 14 matches I'm assuming an average of 20 minutes. Some could be faster, some could be longer. Total time is 280 minutes or 4 hours and 40 minutes of play. Weekly conquest just doing this stuff once a day would be 3,640,000 total conquest for pvp for 32 hours and 40 minutes of play. 

For pve I'm going to assume someone goes at it hog ham again. For pve we're going to assume our guy does Socialite 1 (25k), Socialite 2 (47k), makeb patrol (38k), rep token (43k), flashpoint daily bonus for first run (8k) as the static objectives. In order to trigger those objectives you will be required to run a total of 8 flashpoints at 8k each. The actual range is 4k-8k depending on the FP with variances being due to bosses, mobs, and so on but I've assumed the max to keep it fair. For planetary heroics there are 14 planets one can do heroics on, however an individual character can only do 13 of them due to alternative starting planets. However for these calculations I'm going to assume our guy switched to pick up the 14th planet. There is a quest for doing a single heroic on a planet that nets you 5k points. Then there are the Defeat Foes Grade 1 that nets you 3500 points, and Defeat Foes Grade 2 that gives you 7k points. In total that would make each planet worth 15.5k points just for those. Now there are 72 heroics available on imp side across 14 planets, and 70 on republic. Each of them as it sits right now grants 500 points on completion. For this I'm assuming imp side. If a person triggered all objectives listed above, ran all the flashpoints, did all 72 heroics, that gives you 478k points per day assuming pre-nerf of the rep token, and 443k post nerf. Time wise I'm assuming it takes people ballpark of 10 minutes per planet, 20 minutes for the makeb patrol, and 15 minutes per flashpoint. total time spent is 280 minutes or 4 hours 40 minutes a day. In a week of time that's 3,346,000 points pre-nerf and 3,101,000 points post nerf. 

Before the nerf that left a gap of 42k per day in favor of pvp and post nerf that gap widens to 77k per day. In a week that difference becomes 294k at per-nerf values and 539k at post nerf values. 

 

So based on your information you've given us of 12 minutes a match, that changes things up a bit. I assumed 20 minutes per pvp match since it's hard to account for the randomness of people. So since you're saying it's 12 minutes a match let's do a little more math. Just to keep things clean I'm going to assume starfighter matches also take about 12 minutes. In that same 4 hours and 40 minutes it would take the pve guy to do all that stuff, you have the time to run 23 (23.3) matches and complete them. Total time to complete those matches is 4 hours and 36 minutes leaving 4 minutes of down time. I could round up to 24 matches but then we have an 8 minute disparity instead of only 4. So you can actually pick up an additional 9 matches of your choice beyond what I accounted for initially, so lets go ahead and account for them. If we assume the extra 9 matches are either warzone or arena (game said they pay the same) that's an extra 72k beyond what I calculated initially, or 99k if we assume the extra matches are all starfighter for pure points generation. This would bring our pvp total up to 592k assuming 9 extra WZ/Arena, or 619k assuming 9 extra starfighter per day. In a week that's a total of either 4,144,000 or 4,333,000 total conquest points. 

Assuming the goal is pure points generation we'll go with the larger numbers. That's a difference of 141k per day pre-nerf of the rep token or 176k per day post nerf. In a week that difference is 987k pre-nerf of the rep token or 1,232,000 post nerf of the rep token. To put that into perspective that's like you have an extra 2 (2.02) days per week using pre-nerf values or 3 days (2.78) post nerf. 

That's not necessarily what everyone WILL do but what they COULD do. I also did not count neutral objectives everyone has access to as it wouldn't have made a difference. Some people will do everything I listed and some won't. Point being of all this, it's beyond hypocritical for the pvp guys to complain about my having a 43k rep token when they can generate anywhere from 987k to 1,232,000 points more than me per week and essentially have 2-3 days of extra points given to them for the same amount of time. So if we're really concerned about balancing things out, where is my extra 1.2m points a week? Why should the pvp guys get an extra 1.2m when by their own logic they can go AFK the entire time and do nothing? Again I am by no means encouraging going AFK. However if they're going to advocate my stuff get nerfed for "one click for 43k" or whatever, I'm going to advocate they be held to the same standard. 

[VegaMist]

2 hours ago, captainbladejk said:

To try to ban someone for going AFK they would need to prove conclusively they're doing so to be malicious. You on the player-side do not have any idea why that person went AFK unless they tell you.

When someone is a repeatable AFK-er, it's very obvious and easily provable.

On a more important note, it seems this thread is stirring from the issue at hand to sawing a divide between PVE and PVP players. As someone who plays both and am extremely disappointed with the Rep token nerf (and even more with company's response), I'd suggest we stop pointing fingers at each other and course correct to the issue at hand.

[TahliahCOH]

7 hours ago, Traceguy said:

I said this a few times already, but I'll keep saying it so that @EricMusco @JoeStramaglia or @KeithKanneg can see it. At 5k Conquest Points per heroic, it will take 9 EXTRA heroics per day to get back the points lost from the rep change. That means we have to do 63 more heroics per week to get back on track to where we were before 7.4.1.... We won't taste the benefits of this change until our 64th EXTRA heroic for the week.

They know this, and they actually think people will DO it. Surreal.

As someone else mentioned, we are all adults (most of us well into our adulthood), and we already play as much as our time allows against our real world obligations. We aren't going to magically manifest extra hours in the week to play lame, tired, boring, and OLD heroics we've done a bazillion times already. It's just illogical. Maybe in a few more years, more of us will retire and then spend twelve hours a day in the game. Or you know, not. 😛

Edited March 30 by TahliahCOH

[TahliahCOH]

20 minutes ago, VegaMist said:

On a more important note, it seems this thread is stirring from the issue at hand to sawing a divide between PVE and PVP players. As someone who plays both and am extremely disappointed with the Rep token nerf (and even more with company's response), I'd suggest we stop pointing fingers at each other and course correct to the issue at hand.

This was always going to happen, though, Vega. I agree that PVP and GSF shouldn't be nerfed, but this rep cq change is clearly intended to make solo PVEers "play" (at) PVP and GSF. Many of us won't and will unsub, as I have, but some obviously will and make already bad situations for PVP and GSF even worse.

They have just made solo PVEers who stay HAVE to find something else that takes little time or effort to make up for what was taken (we have jobs, lives, families, so a limited amount of time to play), and yes, that always meant PVP and GSF. But it won't go as the devs thought (that solo PVEers would suddenly embrace PVP and GSF, we never ever will), so expect a lot more of this going forward. I'm glad I'm out. This game is just going downhill with every single update and patch.

[VegaMist]

Just now, TahliahCOH said:

This was always going to happen, though, Vega. I agree that PVP and GSF shouldn't be nerfed, but this rep cq change is clearly intended to make solo PVEers "play" (at) PVP and GSF. Many of us won't and will unsub, as I have, but some obviously will and make already bad situations for PVP and GSF even worse.

They have just made solo PVEers who stay HAVE to find something else that takes little time or effort to make up for what was taken (we have jobs, lives, families, so a limited amount of time to play), and yes, that always meant PVP and GSF. But it won't go as the devs thought (that solo PVEers would suddenly embrace PVP and GSF, we never ever will), so expect a lot more of this going forward. I'm glad I'm out. This game is just going downhill with every single update and patch.

Oh, I totally get it, which is one of the reasons I hate that change. BTW, I may be a PVP-er, but it doesn't mean I PVP on every toon I have. Having that token allowed me to progress my other toons without extra stress, and put most of my focus onto whatever I was actually enjoying at any given time, whether it's PVP, story, or whatever. What they did will effectively prevent many of us from enjoying the game as we see fit - which is the main reason we subscribe - and force us into the content we do NOT enjoy (or enjoy to a limit) - whether it's PVP, GSF, or extra heroics. I don't know who makes those decisions at Broadsword, but they are either intentionally running the game into the ground or are seriously incompetent. 

[TrixxieTriss]

4 hours ago, DeannaVoyager said:

If pvp players don't care about conquest, then all the more reason to nerf those points.

And since GSF is also a form of pvp, it shouldn't get any special treatment either. It's a lot easier indeed and with any any luck you only need to finish two matches for the weekly. It will take half an hour and they get 120k for the weekly plus the points from winning a match twice. On top of that they are getting points towards the ship objective.

Wait a second before you throw us all under the bus here.

Some of us PvPers do both. Especially when PvP isn’t popping on low pop servers (because of reasons ™️). 

The last thing we want is any more nerfs that drive more players from the game. 

GSF hasn’t popped for me on SV since second week of January. And I’m lucky to get one PvP weekly done on one Alt on SV. 

Please remember (this is directed to everyone) we aren’t all treated equal in this game by the devs (even though subscribers all pay the same). Just because you don’t play or like certain content, doesn’t mean it should be nerfed or degraded. That’s how the game loses more players each iteration. Something the devs haven’t worked out yet. 

And just because you might enjoy or focus mainly on one specific content, doesn’t mean others don’t play a mix of content. Honestly, with such tiny content development to the game since BS took over, if you subscribe & you don’t do more than one thing, you’re literally throwing your money down the drain. 

[Saeten]

@EricMusco This thread has gone off the rails now.  @JackieKo

We need this thread to be constructive and the latest posts have become a derailment into pvp vs pve players and is not anywhere near what the topic or constructive discussion of conquest system changes are needed.

 

[captainbladejk]

1 hour ago, VegaMist said:

When someone is a repeatable AFK-er, it's very obvious and easily provable.

I'm sure they have ways to get an idea of who is being a tool about it and who isn't. Point still stands though that they need evidence if they're going to ban someone and that going AFK on its own isn't something you can be banned for. We can all debate how people going AFK should be handled as by no means do I think people should get a free ride for going AFK on a regular basis like that and costing their teams. You don't like it, I don't like it, none of us like it. But regardless it's still possible as things sit now. 

1 hour ago, VegaMist said:

On a more important note, it seems this thread is stirring from the issue at hand to sawing a divide between PVE and PVP players. As someone who plays both and am extremely disappointed with the Rep token nerf (and even more with company's response), I'd suggest we stop pointing fingers at each other and course correct to the issue at hand.

I agree with the bolded bit in principle, but at the same time this is a discussion that needs to be had and is long overdue. If balance is the goal as some people have claimed, then the massive disparity in points between pvp and pve has to be addressed as it's now the elephant in the room. Something has to be done to close that massive gap in possible points one can generate. There should not be an over 1m point potential difference in the two per week like that, regardless of whichever direction it tilts in. As part of moving forward and course correcting we have to be able to figure out what we're course correcting towards so we don't overcorrect into the other direction and still be going the wrong way, only backwards. 

Like I've said in our banters and elsewhere, I don't really want to see the pvp and GSF objectives nerfed and I don't have anything against people that enjoy those things. However I can't stand the double standard hypocrisy certain individuals are displaying towards this stuff. They say the rep token was unbalanced because it was "one click for 43k" and needed to be nerfed, but simultaneously think the pvp objectives should be allowed to remain where they are even though it's possible to AFK them doing literally nothing and get paid more than 3 times what the rep token was worth. Again if the goal is really balance as some people claim, then both sides have to be held to the same standard and that point disparity needs to be closed. I don't expect it to be point for point the exact same, but it should be at least within 5% of each other. 

If we can't agree what to course correct to, then we have no way of moving forward. 

[DWho]

15 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

And just because you might enjoy or focus mainly on one specific content, doesn’t mean others don’t play a mix of content. Honestly, with such tiny content development to the game since BS took over, if you subscribe & you don’t do more than one thing, you’re literally throwing your money down the drain. 

And this is what it comes down to in the end. All of the pro-nerf stuff (from all sides) focuses on what a few players do and undercuts what most of the players do. The Rep nerf has far greater impact on the casual players in that they now have to do additional content just to get 1 or 2 characters to their goal (people who get 10, 20, or 30 to the goal already have a system to get there). With the Rep objective in place you could quickly complete 1 or 2 characters and then go on to playing the part of the game you enjoyed.

I like to get a couple characters to the conquest goal each week. With the nerf, I now have to put in more time doing the part of the game I don't enjoy (grinding content). I like playing the heroics and some of the dailies but don't want to feel I have to just to gear an alt. There are too many people worried about what someone else is getting out of Conquest.

[Traceguy]

8 hours ago, Darev said:

This is only for a single toon.

If you normally do multiple toons on a single day, you can keep going and going and going.

I don't you understood what I was saying as that's completely irrelevant. 63 heroics is basic math. Regardless of multiples toons. 

[Strathkin]

@EricMusco

While I like they are making Heroic's a repeatable conquest, as others have said you have to run 9 Heroic each day to make up the difference.  So would now also be a good time to consider this...

I'd love them to finally bring back Dark & Light World Bosses, just have them spawn at regular intervals like other world Bosses.  It was Dec 2021 went those Dark & Light World Bosses disappeared, that also be another great way to slightly expand weekly conquests, granting 1 Dark &/or Light World Boss each Week for Conquest depending on the Calendar too!  

They don't require to tie it to one side winning a planet like before... 

That would also FIX are ability to earn the 2 Dark & 2 Light Banner's again as well, and finish the achievement for Dark vs Light!  😍

Edited March 31 by Strathkin
Grammar & Image

[Samcuu]

6 hours ago, captainbladejk said:

highly doubt those people were banned purely for AFK as you say. Going AFK itself is not a crime or against ToS

These ppl are well known within the pvp community and have been seen every night in warzones and arenas hiding and not coming out of stealth. Been reported a bunch of times by many different ppl and there's even threads about it in the pvp section of the forums. 

 

6 hours ago, captainbladejk said:

YOU may not care about conquest

I do care about conquest, I've been on the record stating that I usually do like 12 - 14 characters a week. 

 

6 hours ago, captainbladejk said:

Assuming a person is lucky and racks up win after win, that's a total of 4 warzone matches for 32k conquest (8k each), 6 arenas at 48k total (8k each)

So for the sake of ur argument ur assuming someone wins 100% of their matches lol that's not even remotely close to reality. Someone made a post today saying the pvp grind is far too long as they've got a win percentage of 28%, so they are effectively winning 1 out of every 4 matches, its 3 points for a win and 1 point for a loss btw. So without factoring in queue times that's two hours for one wz weekly. 

Anyways as someone who mainly pvps but still does dailys and heroics to get conquest on alts, I'm bummed about losing the rep cp. However I will still say that group content is more challenging and not always available, especially for ppl on smaller pop servers so it should be worth more than the convenience of logging in and playing pve at ur own pace solo. 

Edited March 31 by Samcuu

[Darev]

2 hours ago, Traceguy said:

I don't you understood what I was saying as that's completely irrelevant. 63 heroics is basic math. Regardless of multiples toons. 

We're still talking about related, but different, things.   You're focusing on a single toon.  Quick in and out and what it would take to make that up.

I'm looking at what happens when you expand that to multiple toons per day.

 

Also..your math is off.  Sorry, but you keep bringing it up.  It's a minor quibble, but as Reacher says in the TV show...details matter.

45k (old value) - 8K (new value) = 37k missing points per day.   It's 56 Heroics per week, not 63, to make up the difference.

It doesn't devalue  the point you're trying to make...but...the numbers were off.

[DeannaVoyager]

5 hours ago, TrixxieTriss said:

Wait a second before you throw us all under the bus here.

Some of us PvPers do both. Especially when PvP isn’t popping on low pop servers (because of reasons ™️). 

It wasn't me who said pvp players don't care about conquest, I just responded to it because I find it weird that someone is defending excessive points against pve points, when they don't even care about conquest. I'm pretty sure pvp players who don't care about CQ are an exception, not the rule.

5 hours ago, TrixxieTriss said:

Please remember (this is directed to everyone) we aren’t all treated equal in this game by the devs (even though subscribers all pay the same). Just because you don’t play or like certain content, doesn’t mean it should be nerfed or degraded. That’s how the game loses more players each iteration. Something the devs haven’t worked out yet. 

And just because you might enjoy or focus mainly on one specific content, doesn’t mean others don’t play a mix of content. Honestly, with such tiny content development to the game since BS took over, if you subscribe & you don’t do more than one thing, you’re literally throwing your money down the drain. 

I agree 100% with that. However as long as some gsf/pvp players are advocating nerfs and pathetic points for pve players, I'll be advocating heavy nerfs for pvp and gsf. Ideally everyone would just mind their own business or perhaps even support each other in their requests, but not everyone is wired that way. 

 

5 hours ago, DWho said:

There are too many people worried about what someone else is getting out of Conquest.

Exactly this. 

54 minutes ago, Darev said:

We're still talking about related, but different, things.   You're focusing on a single toon.  Quick in and out and what it would take to make that up.

I'm looking at what happens when you expand that to multiple toons per day.

 

Also..your math is off.  Sorry, but you keep bringing it up.  It's a minor quibble, but as Reacher says in the TV show...details matter.

45k (old value) - 8K (new value) = 37k missing points per day.   It's 56 Heroics per week, not 63, to make up the difference.

It doesn't devalue  the point you're trying to make...but...the numbers were off.

The easiest way to undo the damage rep conquest nerf did would be to revert personal conquest goal to 50k. That would make the game a lot more alt friendly. 

It would also mean more playtime, at least for me. Right now I don't want to play because I already know I won't be able to finish conquest on that toon, and I don't want to start things I know I can't finish so I just won't play at all. Put the goal back to 50k, and the chances are I can finish that toon without having to wonder where to get the missing points.  

[AFadedMemory]

What do you want or hope to accomplish by having the objective award 45k? If it’s to generate or obtain exchangeable currency/commodities as fast as possible to turn a real world profit you’re mostly likely why the nerf exists in the first place.

Someone else mentioned the concept earlier, but I cannot find the post. If you don’t care about achievements or completing the rep tracks fast you can stockpile rep tokens (some of which you can actually obtain through credits) and if you are doing this on 20-30 toons you can get a lot. Dev don’t want you to stock pile rep tokens to complete conquest and GS track (thus obtaining reward That is or can be transformed into sellable credits). Especially the ones you got from galactic seasons (this is supported by the fact they removed the reputation track/token. Personally I think they should have just removed the weekly caps for those so stockpiling usable tokens would not occur. Especially since I’m pretty sure you can’t complete the rep track when that season is over.)

You can’t really compare the pve rep objective with the pvp objectives. You can complete the pve objective by yourself through many different modes. You can’t even play the mode that completes the pvp objective if there are not enough participants. Majority of the time there are not enough participants. Consistently farming those PvP points on every server is not time efficient. Therefore the risk of large numbers of people exploiting those points is low (much lower then the rep objective)

Edited March 31 by AFadedMemory